Database replication through CA/XP

Hi,We are in the process of implementing the DR solution for our application using Continental cluster solution.We have two separate databases in the production. We are implementing dataguard replication for one of the databases and CA/XP for normal files.Due to some financial issues, We thought of using CA/XP for the another database which is around 6GB of data file size.(Redo log generation is very minimal). 1. Is it feasible to use CA/XP for this kind of replication?2. What are the thing need to be considered?Note: We have dedicated 2Gbps DWDM link for CA/XP replication.

Re: Database replication through CA/XP

CA or Continual Access is HP's product for replicating data across a network to another storage array. It is the storage arrays that are kept in sync.Think of the DR site array as just being another mirror disk(s). Albeit far away.So provided you have compatible arrays that can handle this - yes it is feasible.

On the point of what things need to be considered - Wow that would take alot more to respond to. My advice is read up and/or attend sessions on DR Solutions with Continental clusters. Anything (even older documents) written by Bob Sauers are great. Try hitting the HPTechForums in Vegas next month and look for any DR sessions there.

Here's one tip:Resolution - One thing when we had set up a DR site, we realized how important it was how we "resolved" things. We changed so that everything necessary pointed to the pkg_name. Folks forgot server names, they just knew things by the pkg name. PC's tnsnames pointed to pkg_names, etc. This helped because when we flipped sites, we only had to do a quick change on the IP's of the pkg_names on hostfile & DNS to the DR site's subnet and push out DNS. Once DNS was refreshed - everything again resolved to the pkg_names and folks and apps were fine. Took only a couple minutes and was so simple.

Site-2-Site replication is complicated. The best set up is the one set up as simply as possible.

By the way...we ran our sites bi-directionally. So both sites ran work that replicated to the opposite site. By making both site's work, the costs were justified. You may find how mgmt appreciates making every box count - not just sitting there waiting for a disaster.